You make some valid points but running the ball has little to do with winning in the NFL right now. The biggest need for running the ball: to mix things up, inside the 10 and to help run out the clock when ahead in the playoffs

.

In the regular season- yes.

The playoffs are a whole different monster. Houston dominated that game yesterday by running and stifling D.

BTW, I hope after today people will finally take Matt Ryan's name out of the elite talk from now on. He 's as meh as they come.

Agreed Hiko. I said it a couple weeks ago. If you are trying to be decent and make playoff appearances, Flacco/Dalton/Smith and the like are perfect.

If you want to win a Super Bowl, you had better have a guy that can play at least one straight month as elite. Because the guys above are not running the table having to beat Rogers/Brees/Eli/Brady/Ben in order.

Yes, TJ Yates won a playoff game. Guess why? Because he ran into someone who is just as big of a hump as he. And he could win another one if he gets another shot at a hump in Flacco next week. But at some point, he is going to beat a stud. And he will not.

Yes, TJ Yates won a playoff game. Guess why? Because he ran into someone who is just as big of a hump as he. And he could win another one if he gets another shot at a hump in Flacco next week. But at some point, he is going to beat a stud. And he will not.

I thought thats what this was all about. Hiko, trips, Noles and yourself including dalton, Flacco and the likes in the elite, franchise conversation.

Yes, TJ Yates won a playoff game. Guess why? Because he ran into someone who is just as big of a hump as he. And he could win another one if he gets another shot at a hump in Flacco next week. But at some point, he is going to beat a stud. And he will not.

I thought thats what this was all about. Hiko, trips, Noles and yourself including dalton, Flacco and the likes in the elite, franchise conversation.

Personally, I have separate categories for Elite and Franchise.

Elite is a QB that is so good that he will probably win anywhere with any team, given a few years.

Franchise is a QB that is good enough to win in the right system if given help by those around him.

Dalton and Flacco COULD be Franchise. Book's still out on them. I think at least Flacco has shown enough that I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility that he could win a SB.

Elite and Franchise QB's comprise about 15-20 teams. The rest have never-have-beens and never-will-bes, like Colt.

jjgmyers wrote:For an average QB to win all of these facets have to be stellar. Flacco is a good example. He has a better defense, Line, and running game than Rogers has, yet GB has a better chance to win this year.

We'll see this year. GB is definitely hurting on D.

SF beats the Saints this week

I'm not talking for one week. I'm talking a sustained run of excellence resulting in the Super Bowl. Sure SF can beat the Saints this week. Any team could beat any team one week. It's about what gives you the best chance at a Super Bowl year in and year out. I say the best QBs give you a better chance than the best defenses.

Yes, TJ Yates won a playoff game. Guess why? Because he ran into someone who is just as big of a hump as he. And he could win another one if he gets another shot at a hump in Flacco next week. But at some point, he is going to beat a stud. And he will not.

I thought thats what this was all about. Hiko, trips, Noles and yourself including dalton, Flacco and the likes in the elite, franchise conversation.

pup wrote:Now we move on to what will actually happen, and it makes so much sense this is the way they will go it is kind of scary. And unfortunate.

#4 - Justin Blackmon#24 - Whiteny Mercilus#33 - Ryan Tannehill

With Mike Sherman the new OC. Ready to step in as the new Head Coach after a Pat continues to fall on his face.

Even assuming any of this is desirable (Really, Tannehill? Guy is the opposite of clutch), I'll be stunned if this regime goes WR at 4. That strikes me as a free agency move, with a 2nd round WR. You know b/c they're so damned convinced that the WCO can "transform" anyone into a good WR.

JCoz wrote:I dont see Blackmon being there at #4, who do the Rams and Vikes take in that scernario?

Rams take KalilVikes trade #3 to Washington or take Claiborne

Time to BLOW YOUR MINDS, people!

What if StL trades with the 'Skins or 'Phins? Min takes Claiborne and we inevitably pick... wait for it, MATT KALIL!

Man, the riots in this town after that would be awesome.

Sad thing is, I think the Browns (esp. Heckert) would view that as their "dream scenario" (minus the riots, of course).

It isn't what I'd want, and it wouldn't be exciting, but it isn't the worst scenario.

If RG3 is off the board and there isn't a good trade partner to move down I'd be more than happy with Kalil. I guess I'd rather have blackmon but Thomas/Mack/Kalil with average guards (which I think we have) would be nothing to sneeze at.

peeker643 wrote:RTs don't get picked 4th. Teams taking Khalil are looking for Joe Thomas and we already have that one piece.

QB, elite pass rusher, elite DB or trade down.

Completely agree with that, and I hope that's not the direction this draft takes.

My post had more to do with the fact that my head should somehow explode if the Browns ended up with the best offensive lineman in the draft. There would be worse things. My head would be safe.

It's funny that I'll bet the same people who's head would explode are a lot of the same people who think Colt should get another year because his line wasn't good enough and "nobody could win with that line."

peeker643 wrote:RTs don't get picked 4th. Teams taking Khalil are looking for Joe Thomas and we already have that one piece.

QB, elite pass rusher, elite DB or trade down.

Completely agree with that, and I hope that's not the direction this draft takes.

My post had more to do with the fact that my head should somehow explode if the Browns ended up with the best offensive lineman in the draft. There would be worse things. My head would be safe.

It's funny that I'll bet the same people who's head would explode are a lot of the same people who think Colt should get another year because his line wasn't good enough and "nobody could win with that line."

SD:

You can't continue to cater to people who look at players and fall in luv with them like puppies , this is bidness , so the same ones who complain about what Colt didn't have should be making that same excuse for Wallace who didn't seem to suffer the same fate .

Colt didn't deserve the shot Holmgren gifted him , and already takes up a valuable roster spot he didn't earn in the first place.

Peeps really need to grow up and start deciding on whats the best for the team instead of their personal pets.

We are so long gone from seeing what the difference a good QB means to a team , we're made to suffer these fools .

They may draft an OL but I think the plan is to get Steinbach back and move Pinkston to the right side where he played in college. I think he's the RT next September if Steinbach can play.

Disagree. IIRC, Heckert said he translated to G in the NFL after he was drafted, so they'll probably move him to RG when Steinbach comes back (which is fine with me - I thought he improved as the year went on).

They may draft an OL but I think the plan is to get Steinbach back and move Pinkston to the right side where he played in college. I think he's the RT next September if Steinbach can play.

Disagree. IIRC, Heckert said he translated to G in the NFL after he was drafted, so they'll probably move him to RG when Steinbach comes back (which is fine with me - I thought he improved as the year went on).

The RT for this team for 2012 isn't currently on the roster.

Thats what I recall as well.

I give Pashos more credit than many because he played this season on one leg. But that doesn't make him effective or reliable. But other than draft and early 10 camp love, Lavao has done absolutely nothing to merit consideration to start in 11. In many ways, he whiffs were the bad of the OL.

I could be swayed into some faith Pink can play RG, but we need a young RT prospect, and I mean a for real ass prospect, not a Chambers or Gonzo on day three hyped into a player. I mean no later than round 3 in an unusually deep RT draft.

Lavao can serve as depth. Pashos can start until kid is ready or he goes on IR, whichever inevitability comes first.

First pick needs to go to a playmaker already, dammit. You can't pick one of those guys once or twice a decade and expect anything but what you've seen.

They may draft an OL but I think the plan is to get Steinbach back and move Pinkston to the right side where he played in college. I think he's the RT next September if Steinbach can play.

Disagree. IIRC, Heckert said he translated to G in the NFL after he was drafted, so they'll probably move him to RG when Steinbach comes back (which is fine with me - I thought he improved as the year went on).

The RT for this team for 2012 isn't currently on the roster.

Thats what I recall as well.

And Heckert confirmed on his Bull and Fox interview last week. Pinkston is a guard.

my thought process is this, minus any trade downs and assuming that Kalil and Claiborne are taken:

1. RG32. Blackmon.

If there's a trade up to get RG3, then you take Blackmon and unfortunately stick it out with Colt for another year.

If for some reason, the Colts go batshit insane and pass on Luck, and go after say, RG3? give up the two first rounders to bump up to the number 2 slot, and take him.

If both are gone? trade down. Better to keep loading up on Talent and net yourself another first for the near future than to focus on not getting the guy you want.

Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

I hate to borrow a quote from Rizzo, but he's kind of right about this one thing.

"It doesn't matter if we're 12-4 or 9-7, just get into the tourney and you have a shot"

..and the point he makes, could possibly be correct

In 05, the Steelers were clearly not the best team that season, that distinction probably belongs to either the Colts or the Seahawks. They made it in as wild card, and suddenly got hot (whether this was due to the Refs giving them a lot of the games they had was disputed)

In 07, the Giants couldn't even win their own division, and had to play on the road for every game on the road, but, yet again, they got hot

In 08, the Cardinals finished 8-8, and it was looking like it was going to be the Carolina Panthers to be the NFC rep., they again, got hot when it mattered most

In 2010, the Packers again were a wild card team, and yet again, got hot when it mattered most.

and the Giants this year? need no further explanation.

so, what I'm hoping for is, is this.

A QB, that when the chips are down, and it matters the most, comes through, and is able to at least get us through a decent playoff run in the near future.

After that? suddenly it gets easier to build this thing. All of a sudden, players actually WANT to come here through FA. You can nab that one elite fa WR, you can get that elite defensive end.

The key is getting to at least THAT level, and to do so however we can.

Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

Triple-S wrote:I hate to borrow a quote from Rizzo, but he's kind of right about this one thing.

"It doesn't matter if we're 12-4 or 9-7, just get into the tourney and you have a shot"

..and the point he makes, could possibly be correct

In 05, the Steelers were clearly not the best team that season, that distinction probably belongs to either the Colts or the Seahawks. They made it in as wild card, and suddenly got hot (whether this was due to the Refs giving them a lot of the games they had was disputed)

In 07, the Giants couldn't even win their own division, and had to play on the road for every game on the road, but, yet again, they got hot

In 08, the Cardinals finished 8-8, and it was looking like it was going to be the Carolina Panthers to be the NFC rep., they again, got hot when it mattered most

In 2010, the Packers again were a wild card team, and yet again, got hot when it mattered most.

and the Giants this year? need no further explanation.

so, what I'm hoping for is, is this.

A QB, that when the chips are down, and it matters the most, comes through, and is able to at least get us through a decent playoff run in the near future.

After that? suddenly it gets easier to build this thing. All of a sudden, players actually WANT to come here through FA. You can nab that one elite fa WR, you can get that elite defensive end.

The key is getting to at least THAT level, and to do so however we can.

(sigh)

I don't see how the examples you gave obviate what has been discussed here for an entire season - you must have an elite/top tier QB. Maybe that's what you meant by "a QB that comes through?

I don't need to be patient, they're going to be shit forever. - CDT, discussing my favorite NFL team

Triple-S wrote:I hate to borrow a quote from Rizzo, but he's kind of right about this one thing.

"It doesn't matter if we're 12-4 or 9-7, just get into the tourney and you have a shot"

..and the point he makes, could possibly be correct

In 05, the Steelers were clearly not the best team that season, that distinction probably belongs to either the Colts or the Seahawks. They made it in as wild card, and suddenly got hot (whether this was due to the Refs giving them a lot of the games they had was disputed)

In 07, the Giants couldn't even win their own division, and had to play on the road for every game on the road, but, yet again, they got hot

In 08, the Cardinals finished 8-8, and it was looking like it was going to be the Carolina Panthers to be the NFC rep., they again, got hot when it mattered most

In 2010, the Packers again were a wild card team, and yet again, got hot when it mattered most.

and the Giants this year? need no further explanation.

so, what I'm hoping for is, is this.

A QB, that when the chips are down, and it matters the most, comes through, and is able to at least get us through a decent playoff run in the near future.

After that? suddenly it gets easier to build this thing. All of a sudden, players actually WANT to come here through FA. You can nab that one elite fa WR, you can get that elite defensive end.

The key is getting to at least THAT level, and to do so however we can.

(sigh)

I don't see how the examples you gave obviate what has been discussed here for an entire season - you must have an elite/top tier QB. Maybe that's what you meant by "a QB that comes through?

Maybe that it's their breakthrough moment? (although I'd think that Rodgers and especially Warner had already had that).

Those 4 teams were QB'd by POS, Eli, Warner, and Rodgers - I wouldn't be too suprised if all 4 make it to Canton.

How far does Richardson fall now with this knee scope issue? Don't think we need another running back with injury issues. Yet, what if he falls to #22? Don't think he'd last past Cincy at #17.We did pass up an RB a few years ago because of durability issues. And he turned out pretty good.

Sidenote: anyone else remember how, in Wimbley's 2nd & 3rd seasons (I think it had finally stopped by his 4th), you repeatedly saw the argument: "Wimbley is good. We just need a better pass rusher on the other side, because teams are able to neutralize Wimbley by giving him so much attention on his side of the line. That's why he isn't getting to the QB"? And how that sounded like a perfectly plausible description of what could be going on? And then how, if you actually watched what was going on, you just saw Wimbley repeatedly getting handled one on one, over and over again? And then then how you repeatedly repeatedly continued to see see that same argument, either from people who simply weren't watching or those who preferred to not mess up their nice, clean, plausible argument with lots of contradicting facts?

Sidenote: anyone else remember how, in Wimbley's 2nd & 3rd seasons (I think it had finally stopped by his 4th), you repeatedly saw the argument: "Wimbley is good. We just need a better pass rusher on the other side, because teams are able to neutralize Wimbley by giving him so much attention on his side of the line. That's why he isn't getting to the QB"? And how that sounded like a perfectly plausible description of what could be going on? And then how, if you actually watched what was going on, you just saw Wimbley repeatedly getting handled one on one, over and over again? And then then how you repeatedly repeatedly continued to see see that same argument, either from people who simply weren't watching or those who preferred to not mess up their nice, clean, plausible argument with lots of contradicting facts?

I saw one playoff game this past offseason that actually played out like the 7 on 7, can't touch the QB, can't touch the receivers, RBs are pointless, defense is pointless New NFL.

One.

Detroit vs. Nahlens. (<--the one)

(Coincidentally enough, the same number of games played out as ugly, defensive battle in which QBs don't seem to matter: Baltimore vs. Houston.)

These new rules have hordes of people saying so much nonsense that isn't supported in the least by what's actually going on. And then that nonsense is compounded by a really strange way to see positional value in a new way that doesn't even follow from the original nonsense.

QBing is apparently made easy in this New NFL. So when it's made easier, that increases your need for a great QB? Pass-rushers are still valuable...even though they can't touch the QB? But DBs are not...because they can't touch the receivers? Because when DBs jobs are made more difficult, that decreases your need for great DBs? And despite the fact that pass-rushers can't touch the QB, LTs are still worthy of Top 5 picks?

The game has changed. But this way of looking at the NFL is based on a gross exaggeration of those changes. Then the perceived change in positional value is just irrational BS built on that gross exaggeration.

IMO, RB value has dropped somewhat due to positional value shifts, but more so due to RBs becoming interchangable with the evolution of offenses. 2nd, 3rd, 5th rounders and UDFA's seemingly have as much impact as the first rounders on a weekly basis.

Whereas the elite QBs have a much bigger impact than the shitty QBs and most of the elite QBs come in the first round.

If you get Richardson outside of the Top 10, you're getting good value. If you get him in the middle of the first round, you're getting great value.

And yes, running back by committee is an evolution. But outside of giving smaller, less durable RBs more of a role in the NFL, I don't see how that's changed anything in terms of how you view drafting RBs.

All this RB talk, what's the status of Strep Throat/Madden Cover Man? What do you want it to be? With the shitstorm season he's coming off of, his demand should be pretty low, but all in all, I personally have no clue towards what I feel about him.

HoodooMan wrote:If you get Richardson outside of the Top 10, you're getting good value. If you get him in the middle of the first round, you're getting great value.

And yes, running back by committee is an evolution. But outside of giving smaller, less durable RBs more of a role in the NFL, I don't see how that's changed anything in terms of how you view drafting RBs.

Smaller less durable RBs are more often then not the biggest playmakers now and are typically drafted later than traditional stud RBs.

Fire Marshall Bill wrote:Darrin Sproles is a better weapon than Ingram who is what, 4th on the depth chart?

We don't need an 'Ingram' or a 'Richardson'....we need a bolt of lightning like Sproles

Sproles functions like he does because of the offense he's in. In a between-the-tackles run game where you're going to get 20+ carries, Ingram would be a better fit. When he ran, he punished, and hit holes with authority.

In a vertical passing game line Nola's, Sproles is by far more dangerous, because folks aren't crowding the line waiting for him.

The scat back is a luxury we can't afford with the holes we need to fill. I'm all for a Jizz Rodgers as long as Hillis is back, but if not, prefer a Richardson or Miller. Just don't want them with either of the 1st round picks, which is what it will probably take. I'd rather have Adams at 22, move him to RT, and throw humptyscratch FA/Undrafted assbag out there. Especially considering what an afterthought our running game is, behind MUR.

Check me out at Dawgsbynature, where I write stuff, or @twitter as Josh Finney.

e0y2e3 wrote:Citing two speed backs taken before pick twenty five years apart is SAMPLE SIZE ABUSE.

Speed backs consistently have been going late first through fourth round and that hasn't changed a whole lot.

Big Backs have slid down draft boards progressively to the same place as speed backs.

I just don't see it.

The only two really good traditional RB prospects that have seemed (to me) to slide since the Browns have been back are Deuce McAllister & Steven Jackson. I really don't see any change here. Ingram, (like Beanie too) was hype. He went late 1st because he just wasn't that good.

Since the Browns have been back, the value of smaller, less durable backs has increased, as more teams use COP backs in their offenses. Since that's happened, smaller backs seem (to me) to be drafted the same way more traditional backs are drafted. When people think they're great prospects, they take them really high (like Bush & Spiller), when people think they're really good prospects they take them in the 1st round (like Johnson & Best), and on and on.